Cropped Frame or Full Frame???? (Page 2): wouldn't you like to know ;-)...

Cdouthitt Loc: Traverse City, MI

joer wrote:

Clint you wouldn't happen to have a view camera?

wouldn't you like to know ;-)

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

Morning Star wrote:

Maybe this is a good place to note that (as far as I know) there is NO "Micro 2/3" format of camera and lenses; I'm sure the earlier poster meant Micro "4/3". In the diagram this is called "Four thirds system" (Note that 4/3 and Micro 4/3 use the same sensor size).
The diagram also shows a 2/3" size - possibly causing confusion due to the earlier post.

I believe the 2/3" format is used in the Fujifilm X10, Fujifilm X20, Sony F828, Sony F717 and for security/surveillance cameras.

Morning Star Loc: West coast, North of the 49th N.

TriX wrote:

I believe the 2/3" format is used in the Fujifilm X10, Fujifilm X20, Sony F828, Sony F717 and for security/surveillance cameras.

Yes, but that is the "2/3" format, NOT, as mentioned by jmizera "Micro 2/3" format.
In 4/3 and micro 4/3, the 4 and 3 refer to the proportions of width and height of the image: 4 units wide, 3 units tall.
In 2/3" format, the 2/3" is a calculation of the width and height of the sensor (sorry, can't remember off-hand what the calculation is).

There already is enough confusion about crop sensor formats, no need to add more by typos...

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

Morning Star wrote:

Yes, but that is the "2/3" format, NOT, as mentioned by jmizera "Micro 2/3" format.
In 4/3 and micro 4/3, the 4 and 3 refer to the proportions of width and height of the image: 4 units wide, 3 units tall.
In 2/3" format, the 2/3" is a calculation of the width and height of the sensor (sorry, can't remember off-hand what the calculation is).

There already is enough confusion about crop sensor formats, no need to add more by typos...

I understand your point and agree

LFingar Loc: Claverack, NY

sinead wrote:

I've read this often, but learning photography can someone explain this? Thanks for clearity.

This might help you:
http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-198407-1.html
I posted it some time back to illustrate the difference. Scroll down to where the overlays were done for a better comparison. The bottom line is that what you see in the viewfinder is what you get with either sensor. Both formats have advantages and disadvantages. Both also take excellent photos when used properly.

BebuLamar

Also please note only the APS-C format is a cropped format. Micro 4/3 or 4/3 are not. In fact the digital medium format are mostly cropped including the Hasselblad H series. The Leica S series is not however.
I would only call a format cropped if it use a lens mount designed for a larger format and thus the flange to sensor distance was optimized for the larger format and is too long for the cropped format.

19104 Loc: Philadelphia

Let me say that the best camera is the one that you have with you at the moment firstly. But for me the only real difference between a crop sensor and a full frame is that the apparent length on the crop sensor the lenses are longer and I love extreme wide-angle lenses. So for me Crop sensors are limiting because you cant go as wide. For example I have the Nikkor 14 - 24 which is an incredible lens on full frame but if I put it on a crop sensor Nikon it becomes an equivalent to a 21 to 36. And wIth extreme wide angle lens every millimeter counts.

John

Cdouthitt Loc: Traverse City, MI

19104 wrote:

Let me say that the best camera is the one that yo... (show quote)

depends on your camera system...I shot with a 7-14mm (14-28mm in FF terms) for the longest time on my m4/3 sensor with excellent results.

Peterff Loc: O'er The Hills and Far Away, in Themyscira.

BebuLamar wrote:

Also please note only the APS-C format is a cropped format. Micro 4/3 or 4/3 are not. In fact the digital medium format are mostly cropped including the Hasselblad H series. The Leica S series is not however.
I would only call a format cropped if it use a lens mount designed for a larger format and thus the flange to sensor distance was optimized for the larger format and is too long for the cropped format.

Isn't that a little bit of an academic or theoretical or semantic argument? Where does APS-H fit? Also, does it address the original question in a meaningful way? If this is simply wishing to understand the considerations around sensor size then whether you use a crop (or even the term crop) may not be relevant!

Morning Star Loc: West coast, North of the 49th N.

BebuLamar wrote:

Also please note only the APS-C format is a cropped format. Micro 4/3 or 4/3 are not. In fact the digital medium format are mostly cropped including the Hasselblad H series. The Leica S series is not however.
I would only call a format cropped if it use a lens mount designed for a larger format and thus the flange to sensor distance was optimized for the larger format and is too long for the cropped format.

Excuse me, but both Micro 4/3 and 4/3 format are cropped formats. The crop factor is 2. Meaning that if you put a 70 mm lens on one of these cameras, your field of view is that of a 140mm lens on a 35mm camera; if it is a 40-150mm focal length, the field of view will be that of an 80-300mm lens on a 35mm camera.

Cdouthitt Loc: Traverse City, MI

Morning Star wrote:

Excuse me, but both Micro 4/3 and 4/3 format are cropped formats. The crop factor is 2. Meaning that if you put a 70 mm lens on one of these cameras, your field of view is that of a 140mm lens on a 35mm camera; if it is a 40-150mm focal length, the field of view will be that of an 80-300mm lens on a 35mm camera.

That is assuming that 35mm is your base...what about medium and large format...full frame is a crop of those.

Morning Star Loc: West coast, North of the 49th N.

Cdouthitt wrote:

That is assuming that 35mm is your base...what about medium and large format...full frame is a crop of those.

Well, just reading many messages on this very forum, 35mm seems to have been "adopted" as the "full frame" that all smaller formats are compared to.
Yes, it's an arbitrary number, we could have used, for example, an 8 x 10" plate as the standard full frame - that would have been just as arbitrary, but I think we'd get an awful lot of questions of the younger folk, along the lines of "what the heck are you talking about?"
Hmmm, wish I knew what happened to my Dad's camera that took the 8 x 10 plates... probably sold it to have money to buy food for us!

leftyD500 Loc: Ocala, Florida

Cdouthitt wrote:

However, if you have to ask the question, then chances are FF is not for you :-)

I am wondering, on what basis can you make this assumption? I have asked many questions about items before I bought the items...based on your thinking, said items were not for me. One glowing example in the fallacy of your thinking, in 2006, I bought a used 2000 Ford Ranger XLT 4 x 4 after asking many questions about that truck. I still have that truck, simply love that truck. So glad that this truck was not for me.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

sinead wrote:

I've read this often, but learning photography can someone explain this? Thanks for clearity.

Basically, since sensors were (are) so expensive, the first DSLRs had smaller sensors. Here are some good links.

http://www.diyphotography.net/full-frame-camera-really-worth/#more-51833
http://digital-photography-school.com/is-it-time-to-go-full-frame-weight-these-pros-and-cons-before-you-decide/
http://digital-photography-school.com/6-benefits-of-using-cameras-with-larger-sensors/
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/explora/photography/features/dx-vs-fx-its-not-debate-its-choice

Jim Bob

Cdouthitt wrote:

However, if you have to ask the question, then chances are FF is not for you :-)

Geesus. That must be idiot logic.